Children's Social Worker Struck Off

Faatien Le Jardin 'failed to safeguard the children in her care'

Related Links

Queue Returns To Wimbledon Park For 2010

Join the stars supporting the Wimbledon Village Fair

Sipping Real Ale In Gothic Surroundings

Participate
WimbledonSW19.com is the latest addition to the Neighbour Net group of websites.

A Merton social worker who failed to safeguard the children in her care, ignored instructions from her bosses and made unfounded judgements against parents has been struck off.

Faatien Le Jardin faced a catalogue of breaches of the code of practice for social care workers when her case appeared before a General Social Care Council conduct committee.

Le Jardin, who worked for Merton Council's children in need team, was said to have threatened parents with care proceedings as a form of punishment and made numerous mis-judgements about some parents, including one being a prostitute and another a criminal, the committee found.

It was told she made demeaning and derogatory remarks about black colleagues and service users, did not respond to management and produced unprofessional reports.

Le Jardin, who did not attend the hearing nor submit any evidence, was said to have failed to work sensitively with children, telling one parent's child not to touch her with his "sticky hands" when he was eating and making it clear she did not want the children to go near her.

The GSCC did receive an anonymous letter from someone claiming to be Le Jardin's friend in October 2009, stating she had moved from her registered address because she had suffered "severe bullying" at her work and had gone to Saudi Arabia to recover.

In her absence the committee found all 12 allegations against Le Jardin proved. It also found she had worked as a social worker for Croydon Council while taking sick leave from Merton Council.

The committee stated: “The GSCC exists to protect the public and to promote high standards of practice. In order to protect the interests of the public and to ensure public confidence in social care services is maintained, the only appropriate sanction in a case as serious as this was to remove the registrant from the Register.

“We conclude that the registrant had been dishonest and that her behaviour had been fundamentally incompatible with continued registration as a social care worker”.

April 1, 2010